If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

First, comparing Oliver to Robert E Lee is an absurd comparison. One was a war mongerer who's action and impetus resulted in a civil war with untold casualties in the name of maintaining such things as slavery with Lee having been himself raised on a slave plantation.

Oliver was involved in some land claim negotiations that were, yes, poor agreements for the indigenous people but at a time, and in a nation, and continent where such agreements were not fair agreement.

This is our illustrious Mayors statement;

'People we thought were heroes did things that today just do not stand any real test of morality.'
- Mayor Don Iveson

The trouble with the statement is that almost every historical figure does not in all ways pass a revisionist test for morality. But indeed such supposition entirely ignores zeitgeist in time and place and that throughout history humans acts largely within the world, mores, values, precedents that they know, and that are understood. Iveson would know the other side that summarily judging past figures is patently unfair to the individuals that lived in those times. AS we have these conversations its important to acknowledge that.

"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

Whatever. So long as whatever replacement name that is chosen can be spelled without the use of punctuation marks, diacritics, numbers or other non-standard characters and has a pattern of consonants and vowels that is readily pronounceable by a native English speaker.

No!!! Omg what's happening here. Jesus, if someone isn't effing complaining they aren't happy!
You can't rewrite history, or erase it, as if it never happened. Apologise and move on.
This mayor has to go, the cost to erase everything Oliver, for businesses etc would be crazy! Just like Iverson. Damn I'm glad to move from Edmonton, I've never hated a mayor as much as this *****!

Maybe that leads to name changes. Maybe that leads to interpretation. I don’t think that’s solely up to me. We have to have a lot of engagement with the community. - Mayor Don Iveson

OMG! So much consideration and care for a reasonable approach! If someone isn't f'ing hating, they aren't happy!

Hypocrisy Lady's love of hate and perverse humour is well documented. Perhaps the thought of defecating and splooging on the mayor, too, would bring laughter to such an induhvidual. You can't rewrite c2e posts. Just acknowledge it and move on. Seriously ... anywhere ... like, connect2eckville ... become a mod ...

(Apologies to the vast majority of Eckville's no doubt fine upstanding citizens. That would be cruel and unusual punishment.)

No!!! Omg what's happening here. Jesus, if someone isn't effing complaining they aren't happy!
You can't rewrite history, or erase it, as if it never happened. Apologise and move on.
This mayor has to go, the cost to erase everything Oliver, for businesses etc would be crazy! Just like Iverson. Damn I'm glad to move from Edmonton, I've never hated a mayor as much as this *****!

Nothing wrong with Iveson's response. Bit of an overreaction in your response.

No!!! Omg what's happening here. Jesus, if someone isn't effing complaining they aren't happy!
You can't rewrite history, or erase it, as if it never happened. Apologise and move on.
This mayor has to go, the cost to erase everything Oliver, for businesses etc would be crazy! Just like Iverson. Damn I'm glad to move from Edmonton, I've never hated a mayor as much as this *****!

Nothing wrong with Iveson's response. Bit of an overreaction in your response.

I think Iverson is BSC! And my response is exactly how I feel! Get over it!
I'd love to tell these snowflakes where to go. Wimps!

I'm not convinced that there's enough reason to change the name. Some people did things that seem bad now but were acceptable at a former time. When looking at the US civil war, the reason the Confederates are labeled as the bad guys is because when those times were changing, they fought to keep slaves. Well, the north had slaves too, but they had the good mind to realize that it wasn't right and wanted to end it. Was Oliver in the wrong by today's standards? Very likely. He didn't fight social progress, though. It just hadn't occurred yet. Educate about his wrongdoings, but I don't see the need to change the name.

However, if it's easy (only a few discreet locations actually use the Oliver name), then go for it if the majority want to and won't be an undue burden on taxpayers.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

Do people not have a life that they have to go down to the ledge grounds on a Saturday night on a non pressing issue. Are their lives so devoid of any other things that they have to suddenly drop everything to complain about the name of the area they live in. Does it just have to take one or two disgruntled flakes to bleat about someone who did what he did in the times he lived. I hope the clowns down at city hall don't decide to do a 'study' on this and decide Oliver (I can still say the name or will I be struck down by lightening) need a new name. Then it will be all hands on deck thinking of an 'iconic' or 'trendy' or 'on the map' name. How about, whatawasteoftime.

I'm not convinced that there's enough reason to change the name. Some people did things that seem bad now but were acceptable at a former time. When looking at the US civil war, the reason the Confederates are labeled as the bad guys is because when those times were changing, they fought to keep slaves. Well, the north had slaves too, but they had the good mind to realize that it wasn't right and wanted to end it. Was Oliver in the wrong by today's standards? Very likely. He didn't fight social progress, though. It just hadn't occurred yet. Educate about his wrongdoings, but I don't see the need to change the name.

However, if it's easy (only a few discreet locations actually use the Oliver name), then go for it if the majority want to and won't be an undue burden on taxpayers.

I don't know man. I mean it's a pretty solid idea, but the problem is where do we draw the line? Today it's a neighborhood, tomorrow it's all school's, bridges, and buildings. (This is what's happening in Ontario at the moment: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskat...ools-1.4261575
The problem is that this may encourage more movements to come forward to scrub anything that may be offensive or slightly immoral, until there's nothing left.

There are areas in this city that are blessed with names that carry terrible backgrounds. For instance, there is a park by the U of A named after Emily Murphy, who championed thee sterilization of the mentally ill, and anyone else that had characteristics deemed defects. This is park is named after someone just as bad, if not worse then Oliver. Why is it that a blind eye is being turned to this park? Does it have to do with who suffered from the outcomes of the immortalized person?

Do people not have a life that they have to go down to the ledge grounds on a Saturday night on a non pressing issue. Are their lives so devoid of any other things that they have to suddenly drop everything to complain about the name of the area they live in. Does it just have to take one or two disgruntled flakes to bleat about someone who did what he did in the times he lived. I hope the clowns down at city hall don't decide to do a 'study' on this and decide Oliver (I can still say the name or will I be struck down by lightening) need a new name. Then it will be all hands on deck thinking of an 'iconic' or 'trendy' or 'on the map' name. How about, whatawasteoftime.

Change it, and you'll have another group, or the same group finding something else. It will always be Oliver to me.
The same crap is going on in Ontario, but its the teachers, which a worrisome

It's just a case of people having to blame someone else for their problems. Like I'm an alcoholic so that must be so and so's fault or my parents or whomever. The trend right now is historical figures. If it wasn't for him or her I wouldn't have these problems or those problems. People just can not take it upon themselves to pull up their bootstraps and take responsibility for themselves. It always has to be someone else's fault. A big problem in today's society.

I know, right? It's like some induhviduals just can't stop complaining. But, then again, that's exactly how they feel. So, "get over it." Where do these people come from? Or, more pertinent, where does one tell such a snowflake to go?

Oh, bounteous duplicity! That which we call hypocrisy, by any other word would smell like a putz.

First, comparing Oliver to Robert E Lee is an absurd comparison. One was a war mongerer who's action and impetus resulted in a civil war with untold casualties in the name of maintaining such things as slavery with Lee having been himself raised on a slave plantation.

Oliver was involved in some land claim negotiations that were, yes, poor agreements for the indigenous people but at a time, and in a nation, and continent where such agreements were not fair agreement.

This is our illustrious Mayors statement;

'People we thought were heroes did things that today just do not stand any real test of morality.'
- Mayor Don Iveson

The trouble with the statement is that almost every historical figure does not in all ways pass a revisionist test for morality. But indeed such supposition entirely ignores zeitgeist in time and place and that throughout history humans acts largely within the world, mores, values, precedents that they know, and that are understood. Iveson would know the other side that summarily judging past figures is patently unfair to the individuals that lived in those times. AS we have these conversations its important to acknowledge that.

Agree. Love the debate but I doubt anyone in the past or now would withstand a test of time against changing values so naming and later renaming things would be a never ending process, possibly even going full circle over time.

First, comparing Oliver to Robert E Lee is an absurd comparison. One was a war mongerer who's action and impetus resulted in a civil war with untold casualties in the name of maintaining such things as slavery with Lee having been himself raised on a slave plantation.

Oliver was involved in some land claim negotiations that were, yes, poor agreements for the indigenous people but at a time, and in a nation, and continent where such agreements were not fair agreement.

Oliver wasn't Robert E. Lee, of course, but it's worth looking at the ugly effect he had on Canadian immigration law:

As Minister of the Interior, Oliver dramatically altered the immigration polices established a decade earlier by Sifton. Whereas Sifton had favoured agriculturalists over urban workers and had opened the doors for many of eastern European origin, Oliver was staunchly British, and his polices favoured nationality over occupation. At the time he took office, there was already a hostile response building in the west over the entry of non-British immigrants. With their vastly different customs, language and habits of dress, many of these new immigrants did not assimilate rapidly to British-Canadian norms. Nativist groups sprang up to preserve and defend "Canadian" language, culture and values.

Oliver presided over a series of amendments to the Immigration Act between 1906 and 1910 which allowed immigration agents to exclude entrants on a variety of grounds, including moral unfitness, probability of becoming a criminal or ward of the state, and probability of engaging in revolutionary activity. The cumulative effect of these changes was to vastly increase the proportion of immigrants who were of British ancestry, including paupers and those assisted by charitable organizations. Immigration from Central and Eastern Europe was sharply curtailed, and Blacks, Orientals and immigrants from India were virtually barred or subject to prohibitive head taxes.

Should we re-name a neighborhood because of this ugliness? I don't know about that, but I don't object to the discussion.

“Son, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmonton’s skyline.”

Do people not have a life that they have to go down to the ledge grounds on a Saturday night on a non pressing issue. Are their lives so devoid of any other things that they have to suddenly drop everything to complain about the name of the area they live in. Does it just have to take one or two disgruntled flakes to bleat about someone who did what he did in the times he lived. I hope the clowns down at city hall don't decide to do a 'study' on this and decide Oliver (I can still say the name or will I be struck down by lightening) need a new name. Then it will be all hands on deck thinking of an 'iconic' or 'trendy' or 'on the map' name. How about, whatawasteoftime.

Yeah, or they have so many other problems that this is a way to take a shot at their foes.

Anyway, we all have our issues, principles, hassles and hurdles that we feel are so important that something should be done about them. Some people are just more adept at pushing their agendas or are more opportunistic in jumping on a bandwagon to push their own issue ahead of others' issues.

I'd guess that sometimes politicians jump on these things to avoid dealing with other problems that they just don't want in their face for some or other reason.

Oliver presided over a series of amendments to the Immigration Act between 1906 and 1910 which allowed immigration agents to exclude entrants on a variety of grounds, including moral unfitness, probability of becoming a criminal or ward of the state, and probability of engaging in revolutionary activity. The cumulative effect of these changes was to vastly increase the proportion of immigrants who were of British ancestry, including paupers and those assisted by charitable organizations. Immigration from Central and Eastern Europe was sharply curtailed, and Blacks, Orientals and immigrants from India were virtually barred or subject to prohibitive head taxes.

Should we re-name a neighborhood because of this ugliness? I don't know about that, but I don't object to the discussion.

Oliver presided over a series of amendments to the Immigration Act between 1906 and 1910 which allowed immigration agents to exclude entrants on a variety of grounds, including moral unfitness, probability of becoming a criminal or ward of the state, and probability of engaging in revolutionary activity. The cumulative effect of these changes was to vastly increase the proportion of immigrants who were of British ancestry, including paupers and those assisted by charitable organizations. Immigration from Central and Eastern Europe was sharply curtailed, and Blacks, Orientals and immigrants from India were virtually barred or subject to prohibitive head taxes.

Should we re-name a neighborhood because of this ugliness? I don't know about that, but I don't object to the discussion.

Are you calling British people "ugly"?

I think that's pretty established fact. Their food is also bland. Brexit instantly made Europe more attractive and tastier.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

Oliver presided over a series of amendments to the Immigration Act between 1906 and 1910 which allowed immigration agents to exclude entrants on a variety of grounds, including moral unfitness, probability of becoming a criminal or ward of the state, and probability of engaging in revolutionary activity. The cumulative effect of these changes was to vastly increase the proportion of immigrants who were of British ancestry, including paupers and those assisted by charitable organizations. Immigration from Central and Eastern Europe was sharply curtailed, and Blacks, Orientals and immigrants from India were virtually barred or subject to prohibitive head taxes.

Should we re-name a neighborhood because of this ugliness? I don't know about that, but I don't object to the discussion.

Are you calling British people "ugly"?

I think that's pretty established fact. Their food is also bland. Brexit instantly made Europe more attractive and tastier.

It was bland, its isn't anymore. They use more spices and garlic in their cooking now, than most people in Canada :P

Given we've got a series of parks named after the Famous Five, if we're going after Frank Oliver we're gonna need to take a hard look at them too, what with their universal support of eugenics & forced sterilization.

In Canada, the “Famous Five”¯ – the early feminists now lionized for their role in having women legally recognized as persons – were all champions of eugenics and advocated the forced sterilization of those deemed unsuitable.

Emily Murphy, writing under the pen name of Janey Canuck and regularly appearing in Maclean's and other publications, attacked Chinese immigrants, American blacks, Jews and other Eastern Europeans who had chosen Alberta as their home.
She wrote: "One becomes especially disquieted -- almost terrified -- in the face of these things for it sometimes seems as if the white race lacks both the physical and moral stamina to protect itself, and that maybe the black and yellow races may yet obtain the ascendancy."

Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

First, comparing Oliver to Robert E Lee is an absurd comparison. One was a war mongerer who's action and impetus resulted in a civil war with untold casualties in the name of maintaining such things as slavery with Lee having been himself raised on a slave plantation.

Oliver was involved in some land claim negotiations that were, yes, poor agreements for the indigenous people but at a time, and in a nation, and continent where such agreements were not fair agreement.

Oliver wasn't Robert E. Lee, of course, but it's worth looking at the ugly effect he had on Canadian immigration law:

As Minister of the Interior, Oliver dramatically altered the immigration polices established a decade earlier by Sifton. Whereas Sifton had favoured agriculturalists over urban workers and had opened the doors for many of eastern European origin, Oliver was staunchly British, and his polices favoured nationality over occupation. At the time he took office, there was already a hostile response building in the west over the entry of non-British immigrants. With their vastly different customs, language and habits of dress, many of these new immigrants did not assimilate rapidly to British-Canadian norms. Nativist groups sprang up to preserve and defend "Canadian" language, culture and values.

Oliver presided over a series of amendments to the Immigration Act between 1906 and 1910 which allowed immigration agents to exclude entrants on a variety of grounds, including moral unfitness, probability of becoming a criminal or ward of the state, and probability of engaging in revolutionary activity. The cumulative effect of these changes was to vastly increase the proportion of immigrants who were of British ancestry, including paupers and those assisted by charitable organizations. Immigration from Central and Eastern Europe was sharply curtailed, and Blacks, Orientals and immigrants from India were virtually barred or subject to prohibitive head taxes.

Should we re-name a neighborhood because of this ugliness? I don't know about that, but I don't object to the discussion.

I don't object to discussion. I engaged in it. I just don't happen to agree with the renaming and if we start its a never ending process as befits changing and revising history and zeitgeist and events and attitudes that occurred.

Its arguable that it could be even better to remember where we came lest we are tempted to go back. That's another discussion but..

Last edited by Replacement; 28-08-2017 at 10:45 AM.

"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

So do all the people here who are against re-naming things think that the township of Stalin Ontario should have kept its name(originally bestowed during World War II), instead of rebranding to "Hansen" back in 1986?

"Okay, sure he murdered a lot of people, but those were the times, and in World War II he was our ally, so we shouldn't erase that history."

What got me is Iveson saying these things may need looking at (something on those lines). No they don't. 99.9% of the population of Edmonton probably don't give a ratz azz Oliver is called Oliver. Don't spend any time at city hall discussing it. Naming places is the history of a city. A lot of things done in the past may be inappropriate now but we cannot change what happened previously. Why are people trying to erase the past, everything and everyone is shaped by what happened before them. Names are all part of that mosaic.

Uh, Stalin openly murdered millions of people. There's no ambiguity about it. The entire world was against what he was doing from the first moments.

Well, obviously that universal opposition to Stalin was suspended when the people in Ontario decided to name the town after him.

Anyway, thanks for confirming that yes, in fact, there are limits to the "We shouldn't erase history" argument. Apparently it doesn't apply to people who kill innocents. Though that in itself opens up a whole can of worms.

Let's start by tearing down the statue of Emily Murphy, that way we will have Progressive street cred, we can't let the Americans have all the glory of erasing hatred.
Then, rename the Eskimos.
Renaming Oliver goes without saying.......
This is simple, tear down some statues, change a few names and racism will be history, who knew it would be this easy.

Mr. Oliver did a lot of good for the city of Edmonton on both a local and national stage. This is why parts of the city are named after him.
Mr. Oliver also did some things that would today be considered terrible. He would have also done any number of things in between.
Regardless, he remains a part of Edmonton's history and can be classified as neither 'good' nor 'evil'. Accept all sides of the individual, leave the names alone, and move on.
We do ourselves a disservice by ignoring or whitewashing our history.
(Same goes for Sir John A. MacDonald)

I think everyone was racist to a degree. It only became a thing not to be in recent times, about the time we finished populating Millwoods or so. Not too many Ukrainian jokes these days, they used to be our main supply of humour. But..a friendly racism. lol

Its really not a bad idea. Ive been saying this about Emily Murphy park too.

I would love to see more indigenous names in our city, and would love to see us call out the racist forefathers. We gloss over history, their negatives and its a shame. Or we can continue to stick our head in the sand and say "well everyone was racist back then no need to change it"

Its really not a bad idea. Ive been saying this about Emily Murphy park too.

I would love to see more indigenous names in our city, and would love to see us call out the racist forefathers. We gloss over history, their negatives and its a shame. Or we can continue to stick our head in the sand and say "well everyone was racist back then no need to change it"

How long until the names that replaced the old are themselves replaced. Who's to say people are going to stop at just public buildings/ areas. Why not encroach on private businesses and have their names changed as well? What about people? This whole idea that names need to be replaced is a slippery slope for mass censoring.

And besides. Does it really matter that the neighborhood is called Oliver. I didn't know/ care you this Oliver was until now, and I still don't care. Oliver is a common name. Because one person named Oliver did something wrong, does that mean that nothing in this city can ever be named Oliver again?

It's a terrible idea whitewashing history. It is what it is. What next, burning books (oh, been done) because someone does not like the content. History has ran it's course and left it's scars. No one is perfect and some are less perfect than others. Some people have done great things some have done awful things, some have done both. People did what they did in the times they lived in. What is going to be next if we start to selectively rewrite the past. History can only be left as it is because the other alternative will be lies, innuendo, half truths, deceit, confusion and just plain wrong.

We should just stop naming neighbourhoods, streets, areas, etc after people. Who knows what will turn up in the future about them that will haunt us. Forget any positive contributions they have made, we should only focus on what they did back then, even if it was acceptable then, and not now.

Unrelated, but we should also no longer allow corners to be built, and anything with a sharp edge should be bubble wrapped.

In Oliver BC right now. You know the fruit vacation thing. Is this Frank Oliver country too? Sure is smoky here, like eye and throat bothering smoky. Couple of days in Osoyoos next. All that saving of the planet, then Mother Nature reeks havok like this. Yesterday traffic was slowed to a crawl due to low visibility. More grapes and wineries here than ever. Wonder if there will be rare smoke flavoured 2017 vintage wines in the cellars.

I'll make it easy for all of us. Anything with a whitey name, turf it. Change it to anything but white sounding, because it's the Politically Correct thing to do.

See how easy it is?

I mean kind of, but not quite. We as Canadians have long 'whitewashed' our history - pardon the pun.

I think its fair to look at our past and ask ourselves, are these the people we want to honor? Are these the people we want to dedicated neighbourhoods and buildings after? Its also OK as a society to step back and say 'We made a mistake'. We dont have to stick our heads in the sand and say "well whats done is done, cant change history". Correct. No one is asking us to 'change history'. We are just asking to rename places that perhaps we named after some pretty ****** people......

I'll make it easy for all of us. Anything with a whitey name, turf it. Change it to anything but white sounding, because it's the Politically Correct thing to do.

See how easy it is?

I mean kind of, but not quite. We as Canadians have long 'whitewashed' our history - pardon the pun.

I think its fair to look at our past and ask ourselves, are these the people we want to honor? Are these the people we want to dedicated neighbourhoods and buildings after? Its also OK as a society to step back and say 'We made a mistake'. We dont have to stick our heads in the sand and say "well whats done is done, cant change history". Correct. No one is asking us to 'change history'. We are just asking to rename places that perhaps we named after some pretty ****** people......

95% of the landmarks in Canada are named after a "whitey." I can't believe people are getting tied up in knot because a few of them will get changed even if you don't agree with the reasons. No matter how it gets twisted, no one is a victim here because of a name change.

I'll make it easy for all of us. Anything with a whitey name, turf it. Change it to anything but white sounding, because it's the Politically Correct thing to do.

See how easy it is?

Contextually this is kind of silly. Consider the Rocky mountains. Indigenous people explored the area, knew the area, knew passes, navigation, they were familiar with almost all the mountains, rivers, the geography. Yet whitey "discovered" (sarcasm) all these and named them after themselves, or associates, or a sally in a saloon, and printed all the history books so...

Next time you go to the Rockies try to find things named after indigenous peoples.

"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

if only things were so black and white as to make choices like this simple (pun not intended)...

in the end, i think the degree of social interaction that takes place and the type of social interaction that takes place with the named element needs to be taken in to account. naming things like schools which can have a daily and long-lasting effect on those who attend them may be different than naming a park where there is more opportunity to introduce balancing components and educational pieces. maybe the fact that school attendance and the usage of its name is mandatory and visiting a particular park less so (not that we want to make our parks less welcoming to all because of their naming).

maybe the answer is to treat our schools the same way we do our firehalls, by number and not by name? regardless of the choices or options we implement, it should be done with sensitivity and compassion and respect on all sides with the intention that the end results be unifying and not divisive.

I'll make it easy for all of us. Anything with a whitey name, turf it. Change it to anything but white sounding, because it's the Politically Correct thing to do.

See how easy it is?

I mean kind of, but not quite. We as Canadians have long 'whitewashed' our history - pardon the pun.

I think its fair to look at our past and ask ourselves, are these the people we want to honor? Are these the people we want to dedicated neighbourhoods and buildings after? Its also OK as a society to step back and say 'We made a mistake'. We dont have to stick our heads in the sand and say "well whats done is done, cant change history". Correct. No one is asking us to 'change history'. We are just asking to rename places that perhaps we named after some pretty ****** people......

95% of the landmarks in Canada are named after a "whitey." I can't believe people are getting tied up in knot because a few of them will get changed even if you don't agree with the reasons. No matter how it gets twisted, no one is a victim here because of a name change.

What matters? Share of the count or representation among the most important, or some other measure?

In Canada close to 30 000 official place names are of Indigenous origin, and efforts are ongoing to restore traditional names to reflect Indigenous culture.

As the original occupants of the land now known as Canada, Indigenous Peoples named the land and the features around them. As Europeans settled in Canada, they introduced names that reflected their own culture and history. Indigenous heritage is reflected in many place names where European settlers tried to transpose the words they were hearing into either English or French.

I'll make it easy for all of us. Anything with a whitey name, turf it. Change it to anything but white sounding, because it's the Politically Correct thing to do.

See how easy it is?

I mean kind of, but not quite. We as Canadians have long 'whitewashed' our history - pardon the pun.

I think its fair to look at our past and ask ourselves, are these the people we want to honor? Are these the people we want to dedicated neighbourhoods and buildings after? Its also OK as a society to step back and say 'We made a mistake'. We dont have to stick our heads in the sand and say "well whats done is done, cant change history". Correct. No one is asking us to 'change history'. We are just asking to rename places that perhaps we named after some pretty ****** people......

I agree with this logic to a certain extent. Looking back at those in history who would be considered by today's terms as "crappy/racist/bigoted" individuals and choosing to perhaps rename the things/places that bare their appellation to more suitable names sounds all fine and dandy. That said, what will be the cost of a renaming of this entire neighborhood? Especially after the City spends a cool $600,000 on outside consultation and some naming contest (that will likely wind up with "Neighbourhoody McNeighbourhood Face" as the winner) before any changes even begin. Then there has to be not just sign changes, but I can only imagine how many different documents would have to be edited, maps, the list goes on. At some point we have to ask ourselves, is it really worth it? The City burns enough of our tax dollars bungling even the smallest of projects, and the lady from the City said it herself "The City has renamed roads before, but never a whole neighbourhood" which should give a good indication of how well this will be inevitably handled.

That said, I may be biased. I will openly admit that I had no idea who or what the Oliver neighbourhood was named after, but I always thought it was an extremely fitting and lovely name for a really unique and beautiful area of our city.

Removing Macdonald's name from Ontario schools is a giant leap toward reconciliation

When a school is named after a person, that honour, ideally, should not include a major disclaimer or sidenote.

But when it comes to schools named for Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada's first prime minister, that sidenote ends up being several pages long, detailing a legacy of residential schools, racism, colonialism and genocide.

Last week, the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario (ETFO) adopted a resolution to urge school boards across the province to consider removing Macdonald's name from public schools. Of course, the announcement sparked huge debate on both sides.

^^^
with some common sense it wouldn't be that expensive... we already have some neighbourhoods named after trees.(tamarack, laurel etc.). buy some matching background paint and paint out the "r", remove it when used with individual letters, etc. it wouldn't even be that hard to make the change in regular conversation...

Removing Macdonald's name from Ontario schools is a giant leap toward reconciliation

When a school is named after a person, that honour, ideally, should not include a major disclaimer or sidenote.

But when it comes to schools named for Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada's first prime minister, that sidenote ends up being several pages long, detailing a legacy of residential schools, racism, colonialism and genocide.

Last week, the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario (ETFO) adopted a resolution to urge school boards across the province to consider removing Macdonald's name from public schools. Of course, the announcement sparked huge debate on both sides.

I wholeheartedly disagree. And please, get over the fact there's white people here and many decades/centuries ago did bad things.

Does Europe go through this kind of historical horseshit considering at some point someone was always being the aggressor? (and not just the brief Nazi ordeal)

I can follow the argument that School names, in particular, are hard for students to identify with, or accept, and frankly as a lifelong agnostic going to a series of Catholic Schools with names I didn't connect with in any way felt offputting at best. Now if I had been going to a school with a name of a person that had done untold harm to my people? Then what I would think. Schools are so immersive, they become such a large portion of a susceptible students life. Its important that they are appropriately named.

Its obviously a time for a wholescale rethink on Catholic or Secular schools at all. More than just the names of these will change. Also it would remove ample geographic confusion just to simply name ALL the Schools after the district in which they are located. Exception, Oliver, haha. But how many people have had as parents to find out where certain schools are prior to the internet age where you could just look it up. Back in the old days you had to leaf through a phone book and find every school that your kid is playing sports against any given day or week.

At least in Millwoods many Public schools are named after the neighborhood. That is a plus.

But as to your point its easier for you to say "can't we please get over" something that wasn't directed at you or your people.

Last edited by Replacement; 31-08-2017 at 08:26 AM.

"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

^^^
with some common sense it wouldn't be that expensive... we already have some neighbourhoods named after trees.(tamarack, laurel etc.). buy some matching background paint and paint out the "r", remove it when used with individual letters, etc. it wouldn't even be that hard to make the change in regular conversation...

The seminal band, Rush, would approve greatly of names like Tamarack, heh, so would I.

I want to live in Larch Valley. I'm calling dibs..Imagine the golden Autumns..

In anycase in an ever expanding city we are in effect already making these changes, and adapting, through learning all the new neighborhoods names and locations. Of which Edmonton has around twice as many as it did a few decades ago .

Last edited by Replacement; 31-08-2017 at 08:27 AM.

"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

maybe the answer is to treat our schools the same way we do our firehalls, by number and not by name? regardless of the choices or options we implement, it should be done with sensitivity and compassion and respect on all sides with the intention that the end results be unifying and not divisive.

First step to making any setting more "futuristic" is to move to numbers instead of names for addresses! Less "Old Dead Guy Park" and more "Recreation Zone 7".

Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

I bet nobody in this thread owns a business ( in Oliver) smh..what a bunch of dreamers, you deserve Donnie!

businesses change information like this more often than you think... telephone area codes change postal codes get introduced, street addresses change (i.e. having to add the quadrant), office building names change, shopping centre names change etc.

a quick yellow pages search yields 44 businesses that include "oliver" in their name including at least one "oliver's" that is presumably named after the owner, not the neighborhood. i know that's far from a comprehensive list but the dire consequences and costs you hint at just aren't there.

I bet nobody in this thread owns a business ( in Oliver) smh..what a bunch of dreamers, you deserve Donnie!

businesses change information like this more often than you think... telephone area codes change postal codes get introduced, street addresses change (i.e. having to add the quadrant), office building names change, shopping centre names change etc.

a quick yellow pages search yields 44 businesses that include "oliver" in their name including at least one "oliver's" that is presumably named after the owner, not the neighborhood. i know that's far from a comprehensive list but the dire consequences and costs you hint at just aren't there.

Just drop the 'r' and call it Olive. Rename the area next to it Popeye. I know it sounds stupid but it's just as stupid wanting the name changed in the first place.

probably wouldn't work...

most of the early cartoons were quite racist in their presentation of blacks (and this wasn't exclusive to popeye), so much so that many television stations actually edited them prior to airing them. this continued through the war when they virtually nothing more than anti-japanese propaganda.

Just drop the 'r' and call it Olive. Rename the area next to it Popeye. I know it sounds stupid but it's just as stupid wanting the name changed in the first place.

Oliver wasn't being honored because he was a known supporter of slavery or anything like that. He was being honored because he was an early community leader of Edmonton. I suppose we could remove the names of people honored who are not judged to be good enough or perfect by today's standards, but it would probably involve renaming many, many things with meaningless, but nice sounding generic names like Westside Park.

Maybe part of reconciliation is not holding on to the grudges and grievances of the past and so what if Mr. Oliver wasn't perfect? Perhaps we can just all accept that and move on without getting into a big crusade about renaming everything.

Just drop the 'r' and call it Olive. Rename the area next to it Popeye. I know it sounds stupid but it's just as stupid wanting the name changed in the first place.

Oliver wasn't being honored because he was a known supporter of slavery or anything like that. He was being honored because he was an early community leader of Edmonton. I suppose we could remove the names of people honored who are not judged to be good enough or perfect by today's standards, but it would probably involve renaming many, many things with meaningless, but nice sounding generic names like Westside Park.

Maybe part of reconciliation is not holding on to the grudges and grievances of the past and so what if Mr. Oliver wasn't perfect? Perhaps we can just all accept that and move on without getting into a big crusade about renaming everything.

i think part of the problem is that reconciliation is not about dropping "grudges and grievances of the past" that might be attributed to mr. oliver's not being perfect. the difficulty is that "mr. oliver's not being perfect" and the consequences of that are not historical. they affected and continue to affect living human beings in our community.

we're not talking about old scars that should no longer be picked at, we're talking about new wounds that continue to be inflicted to this day as a direct consequence. true reconciliation needs to go further than trying to pretend bygones should be bygones and needs to recognize and accept some things still need to be undertaken in order to stop inflicting new wounds.

Just drop the 'r' and call it Olive. Rename the area next to it Popeye. I know it sounds stupid but it's just as stupid wanting the name changed in the first place.

Oliver wasn't being honored because he was a known supporter of slavery or anything like that. He was being honored because he was an early community leader of Edmonton. I suppose we could remove the names of people honored who are not judged to be good enough or perfect by today's standards, but it would probably involve renaming many, many things with meaningless, but nice sounding generic names like Westside Park.

Maybe part of reconciliation is not holding on to the grudges and grievances of the past and so what if Mr. Oliver wasn't perfect? Perhaps we can just all accept that and move on without getting into a big crusade about renaming everything.

i think part of the problem is that reconciliation is not about dropping "grudges and grievances of the past" that might be attributed to mr. oliver's not being perfect. the difficulty is that "mr. oliver's not being perfect" and the consequences of that are not historical. they affected and continue to affect living human beings in our community.

we're not talking about old scars that should no longer be picked at, we're talking about new wounds that continue to be inflicted to this day as a direct consequence. true reconciliation needs to go further than trying to pretend bygones should be bygones and needs to recognize and accept some things still need to be undertaken in order to stop inflicting new wounds.

Well, Mr. Oliver is dead and has been for quite a long time. I think you overstate his legacy.

Yes, he was an elected official. I presume the things he did were based on party policy, advise from government officials, the sentiment of voters and of course his own personal opinions and views. However, his actions were not based soley on the last and perhaps often they were less important than other factors.

The mistake we make now in misunderstanding history is to attribute everything bad to specific "evil" people in the past. The reality is the actions that were taken then were often in accord with the prevailing political and individual views of the day. I suppose we should blame all our ancestors, in particular those that voted for Mr. Oliver too.

So those of you that want to blame Mr. Oliver, you can bring the pictures of those ancestors of yours to the park at the renaming and burn them too as part. If you think this sounds ridiculous - quite right, the whole thing is ridiculous.

We as a society need to take responsibility for the past and not try pin the blame for the problems on the past on a few people like Mr. Oliver who is no longer around to defend himself in any way.

As a newspaper editor and publisher there is a more extensive archive of Oliver's political opinions and racist views than would be the case for other influential early Edmontonians like A.C. Rutherford, John R. Boyle, John A. McDougall or Matthew McCauley all of whom also have neighbourhoods named after them.

I agree, really good article. I think the reason this has even been brought up in the first place is a bit silly. People are trying to equate what is happening in the US to our context and it just isn't the same thing.